4.5 Article

Perceptions of junior doctors in the NHS about their training: results of a regional questionnaire

期刊

BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY
卷 21, 期 3, 页码 234-238

出版社

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000611

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research [ACF-2010-02-003] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To explore the views of doctors in training about their current roles and their potential value to the National Health Service (NHS) in improving healthcare quality and productivity. Methods: Online questionnaire sent via email to 3766 junior doctors (foundation year one to specialist trainee year 3+) in the NHS South Central region. Results: The response rate was 1479/3766 (39.3%). Respondents recognised the importance of leadership (89.7%), team working (89.2%) and professionalism (97%). Only 3.4% of junior doctors stated they have never acted in a leadership capacity. However, respondents reported a lack of receptivity from their organisations: the majority responded that they do not feel valued by managers (83.3%), the chief executive (77.7%), the organisation (77.3%), the NHS (79.3%) and consultants (58.2%). 91.2% of respondents have had ideas for improvement in their workplace; however, only 10.7% have had their ideas for change implemented. Respondents who had been on a NHS South Central leadership development course were significantly more likely to feel valued by all groups of staff in their organisation. They were also significantly more likely to report having their ideas implemented. Conclusions: Doctors in training have a desire and perceived ability to contribute to improvement in the NHS but do not perceive their working environment as receptive to their skills. Junior doctors who attend leadership training report higher levels of desire and ability to express these skills. This study suggests junior doctors are an untapped NHS resource and that they and their organisations would benefit from more formalised provision of training in leadership.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据